BY MICHAEL S. TERWILLIGER
When the incident command system (ICS) was developed, we learned some new terminology: incident commander (IC); the command staff (public information, safety, and liaison); and the general staff (operations, plans, logistics, and finance). There have been many variations, but basically the good ol’ ICS developed by FireScope in the early 1970s is intact and, when applied properly, is still unparalleled in its efficiency. As ICS evolved and agencies have tried to use it, its application is still misunderstood. We use ICS during large incidents (e.g., wildfire, flood, or even a major bicycle race) but often fail to use the system in an incident’s beginning stages. I’ve heard the following statements: “We tried to implement ICS on structure fires, but it takes up to an hour” or “The company officer on an engine cannot be the IC; he must be with his company beating on the red devil. Someone else should be the IC!” After almost 30 years of ICS, the statements above just amaze me.
Let’s review ICS through the two simple incidents, a wildfire and a structure fire and see how the process starts at the time of the alarm, not when the fire goes over the hill or gets out of control. Let’s start with the IC who, like it or not, shows up at the beginning of the story when the alarm is struck.
INCIDENT COMMANDER
ICS is modular, which means that the command and general staff and all the other subunits are available to be filled if those tasks need attention. You are not required to fill those functions at every call. The command and general staff positions may not be filled, but the folks who developed ICS way back when were real smart. They knew that these eight functions always surface at some time at every incident, every time. How can this be on a simple structure fire? If you don’t assign a person to those functions, who gets to do it? The IC. This takes us back to the start of this story. Every time an alarm sounds, if you are using the ICS, somebody is the IC, and this responsibility must not be shuffled off onto the least-prepared member. In most cases, it should be the senior officer on the first engine responding. In this story, that would be a captain. For now, let’s forget the command and general staff functions. What is the primary role of the IC initially? Developing a strategy or, better yet, the objectives, which is the thinking part of what he is going to do.
At a simple wildfire, this may be to hold the fire left of Smith Creek and keep it away from a certain house. On a structure fire, I still like RECEO (rescue, exposures, confinement, extinguishment, overhaul). The IC then dev-elops a plan, “an ordered sequence of events over a specific time period to meet the objectives of the incident.” This is just a verbal description of what should go on in every cab of every engine as it rolls to the two calls I mentioned above.
Developing objectives and plans to meet the objectives is the responsibility of the captain I selected, not the engine operator or a firefighter or Joe Smith, who is designated to stand outside and talk on the radio. If the objectives and plan are not understood and shared with incoming resources, what happens? If you do not make a plan and implement it, someone else will, and you may not like it. In my fire department, the senior officer first on-scene is responsible to be the IC and establish objectives and develop a plan-no exceptions.
Now where does all the other command and general staff stuff come in? Maybe that is where things get messed up. Let’s look at the next key component for these two simple incidents.
OPERATIONS
The IC develops the strategy or objectives and a plan. Now someone has to put it in motion or develop tactics to meet the intent of the objectives. On that wildfire, the tactics might be a hoselay on the right flank to stop the spread into the house. On the structure fire, the first tactic might be an aggressive attack on the structure (if staffing is limited) or a second-floor search if water is flowing on the fire.
Who is the tactician in ICS? The operations section chief (OSC). Obviously, we do not have the personnel to fill that box in ICS on this engine company, but it must be done. Who is responsible for operations? In this case, the IC. Now that we have an IC and an operations chief, the objectives are set and the engine company is committed to the tactic. The captain is with his crew directing operations. Where is the IC? It is still the captain, and he is involved in “combative command.” You must have bulletproof communications to accomplish this. You must be able to communicate tactically with your personnel, with the incoming resources, and with your dispatch center. There are very inexpensive radios available to do this task. If your captains can’t multitask, look for new captains. In my department, there no exceptions to this rule.
TRANSITION OF COMMAND
At this point, this engine company is either doing a hoselay on the right flank or involved in a search operation. The IC/OSC is directing the process in the fashion he has chosen. Now we have to discuss the “transition of command.” In most organizations, hopefully another resource is on its way-another engine, truck, or a chief officer. We can go two ways now. The current IC/OSC will give the incoming resources their assignments.
In a perfect world, the resources would go to a predesignated staging area and wait for assignment. In this world, they bug you on the radio and come right in. The IC/OSC will complement the objectives already developed. The next engine will take the left flank of the wildfire to keep it out of Smith Creek. The truck is assigned to ventilation to assist the engine in rescue and start dealing with exposures, confinement, and extinguishment. If the engine captain who was at the fire initially had not established a command, developed objectives, implemented a plan, and started tactical applications-and had chosen not to be the IC-what will the next person in resources do? Whatever they think they should, that’s what. Right now, you might be saying we have SOPs and we know what to do when we arrive at these incidents. We are a well-oiled machine. Once again, in my department, I recognize the predictability of failure and, more importantly, realize that choosing to have no plan is a plan in itself-just a lousy one. We try not to do things at a scene that are not orchestrated to the same sheet of music-no exceptions. Besides, if the well-oiled machine thing were true, why do we have chief officers? To deliver the mail? No answer required.
Let’s go the other way, the easy way. The chief officer arrives before the next engine or truck. His role is to contact the current IC; determine what the objectives are, what the plan is, and what tactics have been implemented; and, when ready, assume command of the incident. The captain then becomes operations or, better yet, is assigned back to his role as company officer, and the chief officer fills the role of IC/OSC. A rule of thumb regarding assigning a separate OSC: When planning, logistics, finance, and command staff functions keep you from focusing 100 percent on operations, assign an operations person. If you practice this all the time, it is just like falling off a log.
SAFETY, PUBLIC INFORMATION, LIAISON, LOGISTICS, PLANNING, FINANCE
We are well into fighting fire, and more resources are on the way. An organization is in place and can develop if needed. But what about all the other command and general staff functions as listed in this paragraph?
Well, go back to the primary role of the initial IC. He took on operations and IC. But in doing so he also did or would have had to deal with these as well.
•He obviously was a safety officer from the get-go, and the new IC will assign one soon.
•When that captain told the media person, “I can’t talk-I am busy,” he was the public information officer.
•When he asked the local cop to block the street, he was the liaison.
•We know he put together a plan; he probably ordered more resources and studied the situation. That is a planning function.
•He was thinking about getting water for his wildfire crew to drink and certainly was considering how he was going to replace air bottles in the SCBAs. That is a logistical function.
•Finally, he wants to make sure he fights fire as per department policy and procedure and cannot spend any money outside that system, a finance function.
Granted, the process I mentioned was very quick, but was it not something that must be done? On a major incident, are not those functions doing exactly what I said within a larger scope? Yes, they are.
If nothing else, here is my challenge. If we can agree all those functions are going to happen at some time, what will happen if you ignore them? I tell you one thing for sure. They will be right in your face when you least need the problem. If your response is something like, “I can’t worry about that stuff-I’ve got to pull some ceilings,” then go pull some ceilings, please. Remember to do it in the right house.
I just told a short story of two simple incidents. I don’t know how they came out, but I do know this: I know if the wildfire went over the hill, that chief officer would have filled a few boxes under operations called divisions and maybe created a staging area. He might have lost focus on operations because of media issues and assigned an operations person. If the structure fire took possession of the second floor, that chief officer might have developed a fire attack group, an exposure group, and a staging area. Whichever way he decided to handle the fire, I know the initial development of ICS by the first-in engine company set the foundation for him to do so effectively.
You know the beauty of ICS is that no matter what your department would do on these fires, and no matter what you call it, it fits in a box each and every time. I think we have all watched poorly managed incidents. Sometimes, it makes no discernable difference in the outcome; sometimes, the property damage is a little more; and sometimes, people die.
Using a “system” is a key to effective risk management. The incident command system is just that-a system that allows you to manage the risk with a little more style and a lot more accountability. Can you use another incident management system instead of ICS? Sure, if it ensures a safe and organized event, but the key here is this: you must have a system. In my department, we use ICS every day on every incident to which we respond. Do we have failures and lose the battle? Sure, but we do it in an organized fashion, and we win more than we lose-no exceptions.
MICHAEL S. TERWILLIGER is chief of the Truckee (CA) Fire District. He began his career in 1972 with the California Department of Forestry, where he served for 24 years in the following assignments: division chief of operations (South) in the Nevada-Yuba-Placer Ranger Unit and as operation section chief and planning section chief on a Type I team from 1988 to 1996. He is a certified fire behavior analyst. He is incident commander for Sierra Front Wildfire Cooperators Team, which operates along the eastern California/Nevada border. He also instructs operations section chiefs, division group supervisors, and strike team leaders.
